Hello, Yesterday I learned a lot from a question: Can ArduinoIR Recievers Detect Signals from IR Flashlights? I'm trying to find the easiest way to interface between an Arduino IR receiver and an IR flashlight.

From above question I think that the moral of the story from that was, at least with that particular Arduino IR receiver, it expects a modulated frequency in the IR signal. That means that remotes can work well with such receivers. On the other hand the IR flashlight would not, because it is not modulated.

Since then, I have been thinking about the best next step to tackle the problem. I now turn my interest to modifying the Arduino module. Not only do I believe reworking the IR flashlight may be more difficult in comparison, but also I need to keep the IR flashlight's signal intact.

Question: Is there any hope for modifying an Arduino IR receiver module to capture unmodulated IR? Or perhaps even better, is there an off-the-shelf solution that could work for me?

Further Clarification

Signal: I need to work with an unmodulated signal, the IR flashlight's IR must remain on and uninterrupted. it has beam mode and flood mode, ideally the solution would be robust to bothRange: I would like it to be sensitive to at least 10 yds, ideally much furtherEnvironment: I have a night-time environment in mind, so the ambient IR should be minimal, hopefully only the IR flashlight will be detectedApplication: For the moment, this is nothing too fancy, I would just like to have a green LED to light up if the module is hit by my flashlight's IRDuplicate Distinction: allow me to explain my rationale. The prior post I asked about the proof of concept. In this post the focus of the

question was on implementation and hardware/software selection and modification. While the subject matter of the two posts are

identical, the scope of the inquiry is different. After I got the community's feedback about the first question, I was able to contemplate

and think on how to approach the problem with a better understanding of the underlying principles. At least in my mind, each post

served a distinct purpose. Perhaps if I had combined them into one question it would be more concise, but given all the new material (to me) that has unfolded in this discussion, I probably would have butchered the terminology/physics to even phrase a question that

wasn't really confusing. I decided to err on the side of safety and take it step by step and only ask a specific question once I was confident that I knew how to formulate that question in a clear and scientific way.Thanks you so much!

Last edited by Fred on Wed Apr 11, 2018 11:42 am, edited 1 time in total.

See edit for why I think the above was a soft fist icated spam attempt. Publishing it because it's been loitering for months (see post date above) and irritating me. No harm in remaining content, even if of little to no value. Maybe the author will jump back in now and explain his true purpose?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum